If you use AI only for some specific things rather than for everything, that is not a "grey area". The question "Do you use AI or not" is very simple to answer, and in your case the answer is "yes". If you feel offended by the idea that your game is labelled as using AI, you probably should not be using AI.
The thing with AI is that a lot of people want to argue that their way of using it, or the area where they are using it, is perfectly fine. I disagree, and as a consumer (for whose benefit this disclosure exists), my definition of the word "using" is in line with the one provided in the OED, not with whatever definition you want to come up with so you can carve out an exception for yourself.
In another thread, you argue that you just use AI for generating pixel art (where I do not see why that is fundamentally different from using it for any other kind of art, unless you think that pixel art is "lesser" and stealing it is therefor more morally acceptable) and for animating your own art (where you are still using a machine that steals from every animator on the planet in order to make something you are not able to do yourself). I absolutely reject the idea that these usecases are somehow more okay than other uses of generative AI models trained on stolen content. Plus, copyright infringement is not the only concern around AI; artistic integrity and quality are also of note. I do not believe AI animation is good, and I do not want to be tricked into buying AI animations believing they are made by humans.
If itch.io ever allows creators to claim they haven't used AI when in fact they have, I would stop buying anything on this platform. Period. Requiring vendors to be truthful in their product descriptions is the literal bare minimum for a usable marketplace, and allowing creators to lie because telling the truth might hurt their sales numbers, their reputation or their ego is flat-out unacceptable.
I really do not understand why this is so hard to grasp for some people.